Subject: Re: [PATCH] Feature improvement for CLOSE, FETCH, MOVE tab completion
To: Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>, Shinya11.Kato@nttdata.com
References: 
 <b0e4c5c53ef84c5395524f5056fc71f0@MP-MSGSS-MBX001.msg.nttdata.co.jp>
 <CAD21AoBRw9FY6oNj8ubY7XEwJ9Bprfehu88_ePbCfH93JLxWsw@mail.gmail.com>
 <7559e8ee8a0644c8aad79837092143c7@MP-MSGSS-MBX001.msg.nttdata.co.jp>
 <CAD21AoCCQDXqPwJy08An23VOUSxtd+HLfHPYZ0n2eAXM8MKepg@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
From: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com>
Organization: EnterpriseDB
Message-ID: <28d43417-af7f-c3b8-da19-189a50d2d85c@enterprisedb.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2021 15:00:36 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.14; rv:52.0)
 Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAD21AoCCQDXqPwJy08An23VOUSxtd+HLfHPYZ0n2eAXM8MKepg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 2021-01-05 10:56, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> BTW according to the documentation, the options of DECLARE statement
> (BINARY, INSENSITIVE, SCROLL, and NO SCROLL) are order-sensitive.
> 
> DECLARE name [ BINARY ] [ INSENSITIVE ] [ [ NO ] SCROLL ]
>      CURSOR [ { WITH | WITHOUT } HOLD ] FOR query
> 
> But I realized that these options are actually order-insensitive. For
> instance, we can declare a cursor like:
> 
> =# declare abc scroll binary cursor for select * from pg_class;
> DECLARE CURSOR
> 
> The both parser code and documentation has been unchanged from 2003.
> Is it a documentation bug?

According to the SQL standard, the ordering of the cursor properties is 
fixed.  Even if the PostgreSQL parser offers more flexibility, I think 
we should continue to encourage writing the clauses in the standard order.